Patna High Court
Anil Chaudhary @ Anil KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
Anil Chaudhary was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly recovering 160 litres of liquor from a location not owned by him. He sought anticipatory bail, arguing he has a clean antecedent, the alleged recovery was not from his possession, and the case relied on a confessional statement made in police custody, which he claimed lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a modest bail bond and two sureties, and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent before confirming the bail. If any antecedent is found, the provisional bail would be withdrawn; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody has evidentiary value for granting bail.
- Whether the amendment to the Excise Act in 2018 abolishes the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Section 30
- confessional statement
- deemed possession
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21191 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2026 Thana- EXCISE SHERGHATI District- Gaya
======================================================
Anil Chaudhary @ Anil Kumar s/o Late Bijay Chaudhary Resident of Village-
Leepganj Chatti Ward No. 19, P.S.- Sherghati, Distt.- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 01-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 160 litres of liquor from a place near bathan of
Kamlesh.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
and petitioner has no concern or relation with Kamlesh and he
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21191 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
came to be implicated based on confessional statement of
apprehended-accused in police custody which does not have any
evidentiary value. It is next submitted that after amendment in
the Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed
possession and presumed offender has been done away with.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in
connection with Excise Sherghati P.S. Case No. 7 of 2026
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of
the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case
then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21191 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…